Physicists Dismiss Dark Matter and Develop a New Theory of Gravitation!
Vložit
- čas přidán 16. 05. 2024
- For a long time, astronomy and cosmology have been dominated by the idea of dark matter, which is even said to make up the majority of the universe. Now, physicists are finally doing away with dark matter and developing a new theory of gravity. This means that many of the old theories about the origin of the universe are now being revised and we are at the beginning of a new science. But what will our picture of the universe look like if there is no dark matter and no dark energy? What role do the fundamental forces and the discoveries of the James Webb Space Telescope play in this?
There's a lot we don't understand about our Universe. However, the claim that JWST contradicts existing theories is very wrong! This yields a lot of interesting data, but it doesn't contradict the fundamentals of the current Big Bang LambdaCDM model, at least so far.
The MOND is an interesting theoretical concept, but we do not see that it works. Note that the MOND does not work nicely on big and small scale structures of the Universe at the same time with the same parameters. The MOND theory has long known problems. At the end of the day one will need a scalar field for adjusting the MOND. Going from a simple yet unknown DM scalar field (dark mass distribution) to a diferent hard to expalinable (caused by unknown physical effect) scalar field is not a solution of our spacetime fabric.
DM does exist - so far we do observe it in action but we do not know what gravitational particles/objects ar making it. MOND does not solves the problems. Although the theory itself is interesting.
Sorry, I can not give my Thumb up for this video! Not because the video is bad, it isn't -- but it is misleading containing wrong information!
For years, the dark matter theory and energy have been flogging a dead horse. I find that theoretical physicists are jumping to conclusions way too quickly.
I think they got spoiled with Neutrinos. They theorized that they should exist, they built a detector, and lo and behold there they were! So they thought Dark Matter would be just as easy. Their math didn’t add up so they theorized something to make it work, exactly like the Neutrinos. But 20 years later and none of their experiments have panned out. It’s still there, the math still doesn’t work, but why is unknown.
what’s changed in theoretical physics since einstein? hardly jumping to conclusions, it’s fucking theoretical
@@IRBry No, don't conflate theory and hypothesis. Many of them argue that dark matter is an established theory, tantamount to fact. Some are better at presenting it as a hypothesis.
It's about time they realized dark matter was silly.
😅😅
I agree with you.
its not silly it’s just misunderstood. It’s a placeholder, it could be any form of energy, but it is definitely there. It doesn’t have to be something undiscovered. Some people think it might be related to electrostatics.
Well what is it then smart boy?
@@geraltdelautreriv what I do know is there is a spacetime vortex causing galactic rotation. it has to do with white hole galactic creation, then the white holes becoming black holes. Then a vortex is created with the galaxy going back down this black rabbit hole causing said rotation and gravity.
but I don't expect you to understand that.
What if the Universe is ageless?
Galaxies formed exponentially quicker shortly after the big bang as matter was exponentially more dense, therefore time would have been exponentially more faster the closer you get to the time when the big bang happened. Therefore the amount of time that we think galaxies should form in is only relative to us and our perception of time. Time is not linear as we well know so at the beginning of the universe galaxies could form in literally no time at all the further you look out into space.
Excellent point! Perhaps that's why some new research hypothesis puts the universe at 26 billion years old
Bwahahahahahahahahaha. Ok. However you want to justify it. Word soup.
It was a pleasure to listen to this, free of AI platitudes and journalistic phrasings. Yes I have wondered for many years why the problem of dark matter kept cropping up without a result. It seems like the idea of the turn of the century when some astronomers talked about the "ether" of space. Just goes to show that common sense goes a long way.
I’m curious, what physicists? Also, where are your peer reviewed links to these scientist that confirm your statements! I think you should back up your statements with the peer reviewed details!
Only one I can possibly think of would be Albert Einstein , who considered this to be his biggest blunder.
Mabey we should have believed him.
Space moved differently then so its logical to assume that time moved differently then also , maybe in ways we'll never understand, being part of the same thing,ie spacetime
How does MOND account for gravitational lensing observed? You should have mentioned this as it is the other main phenomenon suggesting dark mater, not only galaxy rotation.
Do any of these theories make a prediction that can be tested?
Haven't MOND theories been found lacking
What should be in this video is that the Universe is eternal . It's not dark matter it's about Gravity on a massive scale.
I would not be surprised that the Hubble Tension problem would be solved if we get all of the MOND equations in place. I think it would involve accepting the fact that some of the Hubble and other constants are not exactly constant. Wouldn't it be great if the Dark Matter existence and Hubble Tension issue would both go away at the same time!
Read the article below which attempts to explain the mysteries of the universe
The first article in Google News under 'dark matter' titles 'Dark matter does exist, simulations indicate'.
Anyway I'll still watch this video though.
Dark Matter is a misnomer that unfortunately stuck. All it really refers to is an unknown source of a gravitational effect.
Dark matter remains a fiction. Let's hope the new story that replaces it is in line with Classical Thermodynamics.
Einstein theory of general relativity predicts the orbit of mercury perfectly it s orbit is well understood by some people. There is no reason to continue watching when you haven't even compared your thoughts to one of the best known physicists of all times. This was actually one of the test of his theory. We know that general and special relativity are not the whole story but what they do explain they have never been proven wrong
Really? How come that Einstein predict that object's time near strong gravity is slowing down. Also fast accelerating object time is slowing down (Mercury approaching the Sun). How these two principles postulate by Einstein instead of slowing down Mercury time producing Precession, which is the exact opposite to slowing down Mercury's time?
Here is the explanation for dark matter/galaxy rotation curves - SHORT VERSION - General Relativity predicts dilation, not singularities. Mass that is dilated is smeared through spacetime relative to an outside observer. Dilation occurs wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass such as the centers of very high mass stars and the overwhelming majority of galaxy centers. The mass at the center of our own galaxy is dilated. In other words that mass is all around us.
LONG VERSION - The concept of singularities is preventing clarity in astronomy. Einstein is known to have repeatedly said that they cannot exist. In the 1939 journal "Annals of Mathematics" he wrote -
"The essential result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the Schwarzchild singularities (Schwarzchild was the first to raise the issue of G.R. predicting singularities) do not exist in physical reality. Although the theory given here treats only clusters (star clusters) whose particles move along circular paths it does seem to be subject to reasonable doubt that more general cases will have analogous results. The Schwarzchild singularities do not appear for the reason that matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily. And this is due to the fact that otherwise the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light."
He was referring to the phenomenon of dilation (sometimes called gamma or y) mass that is dilated is smeared through spacetime relative to an outside observer. It's the phenomenon behind the phrase "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". Time dilation is just one aspect of dilation, it's not just time that gets dilated. A graph illustrates its squared nature, dilation increases at an exponential rate the closer you get to the speed of light. Dilation is the original and correct explanation for why we cannot see light from the galactic center.
There is no singularity at the center of our galaxy. It can be inferred mathematically that dilation is occurring there. This means that there is no valid XYZ coordinate that we can attribute to it, you can't point your finger at something that is smeared through spacetime. More precisely, everywhere you point is equally valid. This also explains the CMB. We are receiving radiation from the galactic center, but it comes from all directions. If the WMAP satellite was positioned outside the bounds of our galaxy it would record a background radiation of near zero.
Dilation does not occur in galaxies with low mass centers because they do not have enough mass to achieve relativistic velocities. It has recently been confirmed in 6 very low mass galaxies including NGC 1052-DF2 and DF4 to have no dark matter, in other words they have normal/predictable star rotation rates. This also explains why all planets and all binary stars have normal rotation rates, not 3 times normal.
The concept of singularities was popularized by television and movies beginning in the 1960's. Singularities were never taught in schools prior to 1960. Nobody believed in them when Einstein was alive including Planck, Bohr, Schrodinger, Dirac, Heisenberg, Feynman etc. There can only be clarity in astronomy when the concept of singularities is discarded
The universe is made from only one particle which has 3 states, left spin, right spin and no spin. That's all you need to know. The universe is constantly self creating and self destroying all the time so there is no need for a big bang.
Magnetism bonding. Galaxies have external magnetic fields that rotate energy within their fields as Galaxies. But the magnetic field is finite in reach and influence. Theoretically factual probability that works with quantum physics without gravity. Magnetism bonding force of pressure. Internal magnetic fields grounding currents into itself and greater magnetic fields.
Nice fantasy but it's not working with magnetism...
There is a simple problem with your logic... and i let you figure out yourself what it is 😁
The universe is eternal period.
Hate to say I told you so, but I did. In the book I published in 2021 titled SECRET UNIVERSE : GRAVITY by Ron Kemp, before the JWST was launched I wrote how a simple fix to the theories of gravity and the laws of motion would clear up the motions of stars and galaxies blamed on dark matter and dark energy. When I revised the equations to include the action causing mass to move in the vacuum of space, dark matter and dark energy disappeared. Then on page 48 I wrote, if I'm right then quote "The JWST, James Webb Space Telescope will discover old, fully grown galaxies as far as the telescope can see, further than 13.8 billion light-years away." And that my friends is exactly what the telescope discovered, making dark matter and dark energy artifacts. I'm glad they're finally figuring it out.
If time is made up and not a real thing, why do we try to give the universe an age?
Vazha vaiyagam vazha valamudan Indian Philosopher Vethathri Maharishi all ready told about this in Bramma gnanam
Ghost energy
please sir Bangla translator subtitle ❤
It is possible to see gravity but it’s not something I’d recommend.
Science has been saying the universe used to the size of a pea for years ...maybe they should not think of what they describing as dark matter....maybe super condensed non excited matter
I have always been sceptical on the existence of Dark Matter and regarded it as akin to the King's New Clothes. The problem is the hardest thing in the universe to prove is that something does not exist. Something I have always find mind boggling is the construction of Dark Matter detectors when no one knows what to detect.
They don't dismiss, they merely suggest alternatives and some suggest evidence for inaccuracy in data suggesting dark matter is real.
Scientists do science, Religious zealots know answers.
MOND is best alternative rid of dark matter. As well I have idea of spiral galaxies rotation. It starts from black hole rotation. Everybody know rotating kid toy then press it starts rotate. So is same here gravity press down but Lorenz force acting with hole magnetic field and ionized charge hole moves sideways. Then it reach critical rotation speed of v = c/ sqr2 hole deformation leads to KABOOM and we have galaxy formatted plane disk with angular momentum and Coriolis arms. For dark energy must be assumed that photon travels in cosmic rays and energy can be lost through the time E = - hf. So distance can be assumed by exposed travel time
Hyperbole
Dark matter always seemed to me like an ad hoc explanation to prop up a theory no longer supported by observational evidence much like "ether" was in the 19th century.
Whole careers gave been spent on that rubbish.
I believed dark matter like I belive in the Dark Knight, strictly comic book man, can't see it can't detect it but I need it so my homework can make sense outta Nuffin.
So where does the energy that makes up the elements of the universe come from? “Lift up your eyes to heaven and see. Who has created these things?
It is the One who brings out their army by number; He calls them all by name. Because of his vast dynamic energy and his awe-inspiring power,
Not one of them is missing. Isaiah 40:26
Our scientific understanding of the universe has always and will always change as it develops. The word of God will never change.
I have always thought that the Big Bang and dark matter was bs, at first glance, arrogant palaver! So there.
Yes, even there is a story of "The New Clothes of the King"- They are "Invisible" but they exists! Probably will be interesting to you my book - "Theory of Everything in Physics and The Universe'
I never really bought into dark matter. I thought that just because something doesn't add up, you can't just come up with an imaginary explaination.
It's not that something doesn't add up, there's a big gap that's show there's something we don't see so you come up with a theory
God's creation is absolutely amazing
Who?
@@geraltdelautrerivGod, Allah, The Source, Prime Entity, Buddha, Aliens, etc etc.
please sir Bangla translator subtitle ❤
please sir Bangla translator subtitle ❤
please sir Bangla translator subtitle ❤